Rand Paul Planning Ridiculous Stunt, Wants to Sue Obama Administration

rand-paul-1I’ve joked (kind of) that the motto of the Republican party really needs to be something like, “Blaming President Obama/Democrats for something we caused since January 20, 2009.”  I mean, let’s face it, these are the same people who actually try to convince millions of Americans (and have been extremely successful at doing so) that somehow President Obama caused our economic collapse and our economy is actually worse now than in 2009.

Well, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul seems to be taking blaming President Obama up a notch.  He’s announced his intention to sue the Obama administration over the NSA surveillance policies.

Paul announced his intentions to sue the Obama administration on Fox News (shocking, I know), and is encouraging Americans to join the lawsuit to, “stop Barack Obama’s NSA from snooping on the American people.”

While speaking with Sean Hannity, Paul claimed that every American who owns a cell phone could be eligible to join the class action lawsuit.  He sees this as some kind of statement the American people can send to the government, telling them that they can’t have access to phone calls or emails without proper legal authority.

Maybe I’m wrong, but didn’t Rand Paul’s party give the NSA that very authority?

The Patriot Act, passed by President George W. Bush (you know, a Republican) and supported heavily by Republicans in Congress (though some Democrats did support the bill as well), was the leading catalyst toward these new, far more invasive NSA surveillance tactics.

Not only were Republicans the leading catalysts behind the Patriot Act’s creation, but since its passage, the majority of Republicans (and again many Democrats as well) have continued to give the government permission to participate in some of these surveillance programs that have come under intense scrutiny.

But now Rand Paul wants to act as if President Obama was the mastermind behind giving the NSA this kind of authority?  Now, I’m not saying President Obama has been trying to stop them — though he has recently said that many of these programs need to be re-evaluated.  But for Paul to imply that this is “Obama’s NSA” when the first president to sign the Patriot Act was a Republican and many Republicans in Congress have continued to give the NSA this kind of authority, is just blatant fear mongering on Fox News by the Kentucky senator.

The legality of the NSA’s surveillance efforts is a debate for another article.  That being said, our entire government — Republicans and Democrats alike — are to blame for the power that’s been given to the NSA to behave in a manner many Americans strongly disagree with.

And this little stunt by Rand Paul is just another in a long line of pointless maneuvers the senator is clearly using to set up his probable 2016 presidential campaign.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Charles Vincent

    http://educate-yourself DOT org/cn/patriotact20012006senatevote DOT shtml

    People who voted for the patriot act in 2001

    http://en DOT wikipedia DOT org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act
    HMMM the FISA court started under the democrat Jimmy carter.

    http://www DOT freerepublic DOT com/focus/f-news/1556766/posts
    Echelon was a Clinton spy program Clinton is a democrat.

    Way to promote party line progressive rhetoric Mr. Clifton. Rand Paul needs to be suing the crap out of the NSA.

    • Jim Bean

      Not only that, but I was under impression that current-day liberals were against the spying and in love with Snowden. So now Paul steps up to the plate to do something meaningful and the Left wants to call him a fool. Just makes you want to bang your head on the table.

      • Marc_Hutton

        Yeah and like you two Paul is a complete jackass since he has absolutely zero standing to bring suit against the government that he is a part of. You see when you are highly educated like myself not only do you actually understand the constitution and basic concepts like Sovereign Immunity but you are extremely less likely to be a conservative republican. In fact out of PhD Scientist like myself only 6% are republican. Why, because people like Jim Bean and Charles Vincent make educated people like me want to bang your heads on a table because we find your ignorance and lack of basic thinking skills absolutely intolerable.

      • moe/larry & curly keys

        hey marc,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, can I hold those two as U punch them ? ( here in FLA its called “stand ur ground”)
        Im enjoying the “financially prudent” tea (BAG) party regressive wasting TAXPAYERS money just to garner MORE notoriety as CHRISTIE is atop the GOP “hopefuls” charts

      • Charles Vincent

        PHD huh is that anything like MIghty tegu/Gemmaliar/ regressive rightwing trash and the hot women he says he has slept with? Look Chief every link I listed is a fact. Second it doesn’t take a PhD to understand the constitution or the sovereign person/immunity concept.
        I challenge your assertion that intelligent people vote democrat.
        http://voices DOT yahoo DOT com/presidential-politics-more-educated-vote-republican-5567599 DOT html

        I also have a hard time buying that you’re a PhD considering the blatant Ad Hominem attack, Someone with an education would refute the argument not resort to personal attacks.

        I also cant believe you think democrats and republicans are different in any meaningful way.

        http://www DOT youtube DOT com/watch?v=mk8pxyAWTBk

      • Marc_Hutton

        Oh and just like Science in general, the great thing about my education is regardless if you believe it or not it is true. You received the exact response that you deserved given your initial post and you only have to look at the number of likes my post has to understand that the majority who read the post agree with me.

      • Charles Vincent

        the number of likes on a liberal page… right like that means something other than it being like your mom saying my boy is a genius and is smarter than Einstein… sort of bias there GG though and people that are drug addicts think they can control the problem.

      • Charles Vincent

        Dear Marc Your post was deleted because it had a hyperlink.

      • Jim Bean

        I guess, scientifically speaking, the only thing that makes a liberal angrier than a conservative disagreeing with him is a conservative agreeing with him.

      • 2Smart2bGOP

        Conservatives can’t be expected to understand liberal thinking. Everything that Peanuthead Paul does is stone-cold self serving. And this is just another pathetic attempt at relevancy. When it comes time for reelection, Paul will have to dig up his phoney credentials and go back to his “practice.”

      • Jim Bean

        I agree with your first sentence since liberal ‘thinking’ fall outside the accepted definition of the term.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        “Thinking” is not even remotely related to conservatives. The term “knee-jerk reaction” comes to mind.

      • 2Smart2bGOP

        Interesting statement to make, considering that the predominately red states are also lowest ranked in education. But you’re obviously a conservative, so you’d be forgiven for overlooking things like, you know, facts.

      • Jim Bean

        The top ten states most in debt are blue. How ‘smart is that?’ The sixth poorest city in the nation (Cumberland) is in the richest (blue) state – Maryland. How did that happen? (Answer – government invests tax dollars based on the number of votes in any given region. Sparsely populated regions fair poorer in all indicators as a result and generally, those regions vote red because they know the Dems will shortchange them.)

      • 2Smart2bGOP

        And the red states are lowest in education, take more federal dollars than than they pay in, lowest in median family income, highest divorce rates, lowest life expectancy, higher percentage of families living below the poverty line, and higher infant mortality rates. I could go on. But all these facts and your “facts” as well, are merely the distraction from the point of this article, which is that Rand Paul is an ignorant, irrelevant pissant who is staging this “lawsuit” as a pathetic attempt to stay in the public eye. He thinks he can be president. Not a snowballs chance in hell. I know it’s difficult for conservatives to stay on message, especially when the message is not flattering to them, but do TRY to stay on topic and not resort to the Republican methods of distraction. It demeans you.

      • Jim Bean

        The ‘topic’, if you could recall was, ‘Why would Paul resort to a stupid lawsuit rather than use his power to introduce some meaningful legislation to prevent Obama’s unlawful surveillance?” At that point, I introduced the unfortunate detractor to two bills sponsored or co-sponsored by Paul (S.1016 and S. 3287)to do just that. Said detractors, then having lost the argument and having embarrassed themselves in the process, wanted to change subject and talk about red vs. blue states.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Suing the feds is a pointless exercise. He’s in Congress. How about Congress doing its job and putting an end to domestic surveillance? Oh, and the votes have to be PUBLIC.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      FISA court was established to provide oversight, something Bush never believed in. The right like spying as long as it isn’t on them.

      • Charles Vincent

        Bush had more oversight than Obama. The trend seem to be to less and less oversight.

  • Peter Simatos

    Something meaningful Jim? Do you really believe he has a leg to stand on. Not that it might have merit but suing the president for something congress and the previous president passed is asinine. Not how government works and Rand Paul has demonstrated often that he is clueless in this aspect.

    • Jim Bean

      Given that Obama has suspended the legislative process, I can’t think of any other avenues, can you?

      S. 3287 (112th): Preserving Freedom from
      Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2012

      Sponsor: Sen. Rand Paul [R-KY]

      Introduced: Jun 12, 2012

      Referred to Committee: Jun 12, 2012

      S. 1076 (112th): A bill to modify the roving wiretap authority of the Foreign
      Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

      Sponsor: Sen. Rand Paul [R-KY]

      Introduced: May 25, 2011

      Referred to Committee: May 25, 2011

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        When did Obama suspend the legislative process? Are you talking about executive orders, which were issued by Reagan 381 times, Dubya 291 times and Obama 161 times?

      • Stephen Barlow

        hahahahaAAA!!! ThePRESIDENT is holding bills on the Speaker’s desk? Please explain THAT one!

  • Mohamed El-Darwish

    This is wshington, FP be above it! write about the real issues, whats happening in the courts?

  • Edward Krebbs

    You’d think a legal genius would know that the ability to bring suit against the government is extremely limited and requires you to have an extremely strong case. Not to mention, isn’t it the repubs who scream about frivolous lawsuits ? And is he mentioning that Ron Paul was in Congress all through the Anti-Patriot Act ? Fiscal responsibility doesn’t go with pulling stunts which eat up resources and divert attention from more important matters !

    • mshickman_31088

      I thought he was an ophthalmologist who only got certification because he created his own board. lol

  • Edward Krebbs

    I do hope that the attorneys for the USA ask the courts to award them triple the cost of litigating this suit – as allowed for in frivolous lawsuits.

    • Stephen Barlow

      I think EACH of the right wing scamtanks should be sued under RICO.

  • Richard Clark Eckert

    GOP is an orgasm of intellectual anarchy.

  • strayaway

    Senator Sanders asked the NSA point blank a couple of days ago if the NSA was spying on Congress members and other elected officials. The Washington Post just reported that the NSA refused to deny doing so and gave some line about Congress getting the same protection as other Americans. Thank goodness for Sen. Leahy, Sen. Paul, and a few others who are standing up to the police state. No, President Obama didn’t start this. Thats what Watergate was all about too. Fortunately, Nixon was hounded out of office for stealing information from Democrats. Now, it’s Obama presiding over something much bigger. Let’s see who sides with the 4th Amendment and who sides with the police state. This is colossal. Congress has been compromised if its members have been spied upon. Maybe this is why we get such screwy votes sometimes. I wish Leahy would have also asked if Supreme Court justices were also getting spied upon.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      Those of us who grew up in the 1960s are amused at those of you who think Obama is the only one spying on us. I can almost guarantee the FBI has a file on me for publishing an underground newspaper in high school in 1971.

      • strayaway

        Who said that Obama is the only one spying on us? I already mentioned that Nixon and Watergate and how it contributed to him exiting the White House. What falls short of amusing however, are people who have turned their backs on the what happened then and make excuses for even broader attacks on privacy now.

      • Dave

        Bush wouldn’t leave. His ego liked being president. He knew if he made himself president for life, people would revolt and he would have been a deadman. Now he kicks it in his Dallas condo and hangs out with Nolan Ryan.

    • Dave

      The republican party IS the police state! You mods passed the patriot act and blame democrats for it. That is how you Nazi Republicans are.

      • strayaway

        Sorry Dave but Clapper, who lied to Congress, was appointed by Obama; the same Obama who tried to prevent a court from ruling on the NSA. The majority of Democrats in both the House and Senate joined Republicans to pass the Patriot Act. Only Sen. Feingold voted against it in the Senate. You need to get your facts straight.

      • Dave

        Blah…blah…blah Nazi Republicans are always full of shit. Your party needs to be outlawed. Do us all a favor and leave America today. I’m so ready for civil war so a bunch of lying republicans can be killed without consequence.

      • strayaway

        Dave, I don’t think you are the best “progressive” spokesperson on this board.

      • Charles Vincent

        Food for thought;
        http://www DOT youtube DOT com/watch?v=vtQ7LNeC8Cs#t=3672

  • Greg S.

    Maybe they should work on this instead of trying to repeal Obamacare. Seems like the Patriot Act needs some tweaking. I think it was sort of a knee-jerk reaction to the 911 event. I am not sure what damages I could claim under Paul’s law suit. Maybe we should sue all the Congressmen and women that voted for it in 2001? Obama inherited it as law and could claim he did not know the extent of the CIA’s spying. That is a defense that worked real well for Richard Daley in Chicago every time something went wrong in his administration. “I had no idea that was going on.”

    • strayaway

      Or just lie as Obama appointee Clapper did to Congress. Are members of Congress too afraid about what the NSA knows about them to demand a perjury conviction against Clapper? On the other side of the equation, according to the NY Times, Obama tried to prevent a judge from ruling on the constitutionality of the NSA spying on Americans.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Yeah and if Obama stopped all spying (meaning other countries) you’d be whining about him being soft on terrorists.

      • strayaway

        There was a time when a lot of “progressives” fought for privacy and civil liberties. Orwell warned us about people like you. The foreign policies of Bush and Obama have created terrorists but unlike you, I would prefer politicians who respect the 4th. Amendment.

      • Dave

        Orwell really warned us about Nazis like strayaway. What are you really straying away from. Your Nazi political beliefs? You Nazis are all about plausible deniability.

      • strayaway

        Dave, pulling out the nazi card destroys one’s credibility in any discussion. I would suggest using facts and numbers to improve your image.

      • Stephen Barlow

        I agree. inflammatory rhetoric is really a losers play. Like doubling on a pair of 7’s.

      • Dave

        Split 7’s vs 3-6, otherwise hit.

      • Stephen Barlow

        Usually. I sit at the last seat and watch the cards turn. no guarantees, but I can spot trends without actually ‘counting cards’.

      • Dave

        Me too. 3rd base is where to play.

      • Dave

        Guess again Strayaway. you can’t handle the truth huh? Stay home then bitch!

      • strayaway

        Dave, Thanks for again making my point about intolerance and providing a demonstration.

      • Stephen Barlow

        I would too. Can you name me ONE single Republican that didn’t vote YES to the Patriot SPY Act?

      • strayaway

        Answer: Yes, Congressman Ron Paul

      • Stephen Barlow

        Isn’t paul’s dad an independent?
        Any others?

        Any others vote AGAINST the imperialist invasion on false pretenses of iraq?

        Any others vote AGAINST expanding the war in Iraq once the Bush intel was found out to have been manufactured from fabricated data?

      • strayaway

        Answer – In the House the following Republicans voted against the Patriot Act and its renewals:

        Otter, Ney, and Ron Paul voted against it in 2001.

        Bartlett, Bishop, Johnson, Jones, Lucas, Mack, Manzullo, Otter, Oxley, Ron Paul, Rohrabacher,, and Young in 2006

        Justin Amash (Mich.), Roscoe G. Bartlett (Md.), Rob Bishop (Utah), Paul Broun (Ga.), John Campbell (Calif.), John J. Duncan Jr. (Tenn.), Michael G. Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Christopher P. Gibson (N.Y.), Tom Graves (Ga.) Dean Heller (Nev.), Randy Hultgren (Ill.), Timothy V. Johnson (Ill.), Walter B. Jones (N.C.), Jack Kingston (Ga.), Raul R. Labrador (Idaho), Connie Mack (Fla.), Kenny Marchant (Tex.), Tom McClintock (Calif.), Ron Paul (Tex.), Denny Rehberg (Mont.), Phil Roe (Tenn.), Dana Rohrabacher (Calif.), Robert Schilling (Ill.), David Schweikert (Ariz.), Rob Woodall (Ga.), Don Young (Alaska). in 2011

        Let’s not forget that Senator Obama and President Obama has always been a proponent of the Patriot Act.

        I think that you would be very please with Justin Amash’s record on such matters. Amash is doing such a good job that Karl Rove is financing a neocon to run against him in the primary. Massie is another anti-war, anti-police state congressman to watch.

        Ron’s dad, Ron Paul, won 7 states in the 2012 Republican primary.

      • Greg S.

        Check your history sir. Obama has not and is not a proponent of the Patriot Act. As President his role is to protect the American people and it puts him in a tight spot. What would you do with something that seems to be working? I wouldn’t second guess our President. He is doing just fine winding wars down and bringing our economy back even though Republicans have tried to distract and obstruct him at every turn. What a pathetic bunch political amateurs. Their demise is inevitable if they stay this course of going backwards.

      • strayaway

        On 5/26/11 Obama signed a four year extension of the Patriot Act with an auto-pen in France. Rand Paul had been holding it up because of his concerns about its abuse of privacy rights.

        “The Patriot Act has been used improperly again and again by law enforcement to invade Americans’ privacy and violate their constitutional rights,” said Laura W. Murphy, director of the ACLU Washington legislative office.” -Huffington Post

        “Supporting legal analysis of the Patriot Act which was passed by Congress and developed by Department of Justice lawyers in the Bush administration was mentioned in the letter to Leahy. “We believe that the basic justification offered to Congress in 2001 for the roving authority remains valid today.”

        The letter also notes that the Obama Justice Department will support the reauthorization of the controversial business record provision in section 215 known as “the library provision.”

        “We also recommend reauthorizing section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, which allows the FISA court to compel the production of business records. The business records provision addresses a gap in intelligence collection authorities and has proven valuable in a number of contexts.” -ABC NEWS

        So you are very wrong that President Obama “has not and is not a proponent of the Patriot Act.”

        Protecting the American people is one thing. That is his duty. Spying in violation of the Fourth Amendment on Americans, the press, and even Congress is another matter. Leave that to dictatorships. Obviously you wouldn’t second guess our President. Why he could be our new Nixon. Obama tried to extend both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars by the way and pummeled Libya no to mention sending drones into How many countries? Sounds like a recipe to create terrorist to me. Secret courts, no warrants, and spying on Americans must be your idea of progressivism.

      • Stephen Barlow

        If Obama were against it, would Paul have suddenly become a Patriot Act patriot?

      • strayaway

        From an exchange between Wolf Blitzer and Rand Paul about the Syria settlement:

        Blitzer: “Does the president deserve at least some credit for moving the situation potentially towards this diplomatic breakthrough?”

        Paul: “I don’t see this in partisan way where I’ve got to say ‘Oh, the president doesn’t get credit,’” “Give credit where credit is due, and if we get a diplomatic solution, absolutely.”

      • Greg S.

        The Patriot Act has had revisions and will continue to be revised. NO ONE is for repealing the entire ACT. Unfortunately Obama can not cherry pick what parts he wants to enforce. The CIA will use it to it’s full extent and push limits with or without the President’s permission. I am not a proponent of warrant-less wiretapping as done under GWB. Obama is on record as being against it also. Do your research, go back further and read Obama speeches as a Senator and Candidate. It is very clear where he stands but the President does not make law, Congress does and sometime you have to take some bad with the good as laws and bills contain several actions on the issue.

      • strayaway

        Greg, Before, you wrote, “Obama has not and is not a proponent of the Patriot Act” and I disproved you by showing what he passed. Now you are saying that well he didn’t have a choice. He was in a no compromise mood when he shut down the government recently so we know that he doesn’t buckle when he doesn’t want to. Whatever happened to “the buck stops here?”. Maybe getting more money to spend is a higher priority of his than upholding the 4th Amendment.

        Look up a guy named Snowden. He spilled the beans on your illusion that warrantless wiretapping ended with Bush. Obama is on record as promising to end the Iraq war immediately and telling us we could keep our plan and doctor and that insurance costs would go down an average of $2,500 per family. So what does it matter what Obama is on record for? Actions speak louder than words. If someone in the CIA is doing things without permission, they should be removed. When Clapper perjured himself in front of Congress, that should have been the end of his career. The President should have fired Clapper instead of keeping him on the payroll. If Clapper had gotten away with his lies, Congress would have legislated measures based on his lies sort of like Bush lying about the WMDs in Iraq.

        You must have missed this so I will post it again:

        “The Patriot Act has been used improperly again and again by law enforcement to invade Americans’ privacy and violate their constitutional rights,” said Laura W. Murphy, director of the ACLU Washington legislative office.” -Huffington Post

        It’s like there are so many “progressives” here championing the police state and opposing the ACLU.

      • Greg S.

        Are you pretending not to know how politics works in Washington ? Voting for a bill hardly means you support it entirely. Our government does a lot of terrible things. Snowmen will probably not live to tell you how bad it really is. You have no idea but take my word for it that we are much better with Obama than GWB . The Patriot Act was a lot about getting the CIA and FBI to work together and setting some ground rules to operate under. It is best to just stay off their radar . If Bernie Madoff can do it, then most of you have nothing to worry about. Pretend God is watching your every move and act accordingly .

        As far as Obamacare , Obama is a saint for taking this issue on and standing firm for the better good of us all. You can tell he really believes in it. Look at the big picture, most will have better insurance and will be going to their same doctor. When folks get their government subsidy and refund from their insurance company, only then will they understand that Obamacare is pretty neat! Give it a year or two!

      • strayaway

        I know only too well how Washington works. I prefer those rare politicians who accept responsibility. Voting for the Iraq war, like Hillary did, left thousands of Americans dead. Passing the renewal of the Patriot Act as Senator and President Obama did, was an attack on the 4th Amendment. The Patriot Act was about a lot of things not just the thing you mention. “Pretend God is watching your every move and act accordingly.” Really? You seem like Big Brother’s spokesman.

        I came across an eloquent and powerful Chris Hedges article yesterday regarding such attacks on the 4th Amendment and what it means to our lives. snip:

        “If we do not immediately dismantle the security and surveillance apparatus, there will be no investigative journalism or judicial oversight to address abuse of power. There will be no organized dissent. There will be no independent thought. Criticisms, however tepid, will be treated as acts of subversion. And the security apparatus will blanket the body politic like black mold until even the banal and ridiculous become concerns of national security.”

        That’s where people like you who cannot discern and separate legitimate foreign threats from reading our elected representatives mail are taking us. Google the article : “Chris Hedges The Last Gasp of American Democracy” found on truthdig.

      • Paul Browne

        “He was in a no compromise mood when he shut down the government recently…”

        Outright lie, Ted Cruz forced the Government shut-down, and everybody knows it. Watch the mid-term results and learn who takes the blame.

      • strayaway

        No. Fact. In the second round, the House passed a budget that would have delayed the implementation of the (un)ACA for a year. The President would not compromise and the government shut down. The irony is that after 5M Americans lost their policies because of the (un)ACA, the President used his magical dictatorial executive powers to rewrite the (un)ACA and delay major parts of the (in)ACA for one year. Why didn’t he just sign off on the Republican bill instead of refusing to compromise and doing what the Republicans wanted him to do a month later?

      • Paul Browne

        Just repeating Ted Cruz’s nonsense makes you look as delusional as he is.

      • strayaway

        Paul, I haven’t heard Cruz say most of those things. Would you cite your references please? Or are you just trying to say that they are the sort of things Cruz could be expected to notice too and you wish that no one would notice them?

      • Stephen Barlow

        He could do a LOT better at winding down the wars and spending all that bribe money on Pakistan and the Karzai gov’t. Egypt could lose a few billion as well as… well all the rest of our enemies.

      • Stephen Barlow

        BEcause there is no “independent” primary.

        Thanks for the info. nice to be wrong in a good way once in a while.

        So, WHY have all those who are still in office voted EN MASSE against ANY form of growth for the American People since Jan 20, 2009?

      • strayaway

        Stephen, My take is that the majority of Republicans, like a slightly smaller percentage of Democrats are aligned with the 1%. A Smaller percentage of Republicans, much smaller, simply have their hands lied by the Constitution regarding delegated powers and/or don’t believe that many of the things the federal government does have positive effects anyway. Harding’s response to high unemployment worked better.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      I think Facebook spies on me far more than then NSA.

      • Charles Vincent

        Here is a nugget for you;
        http://www DOT youtube DOT com/watch?v=vtQ7LNeC8Cs#t=3672

  • Greg S.

    I get a kick out of Republicans. They have no problem believing God is watching everything the do but they really don’t like a computer keeping track of their calls. Who are they really afraid of?

    • Dave

      The Patriot act is the Nazis law!

    • Stephen Barlow

      ROTFLMAO!!!!! Ain’t that about right! Not to mention the white Santa snooping and cataloging all their naughtiness.

  • FD Brian

    Instead of doing publicity stunts, maybe Rand should get back to doing the business that the people elected him to do and take less than 34 weeks off a year to do it. What’s next for Rand, jumping a caged shark in the ocean on skis while wearing a leather jacket?

    • Stephen Barlow

      What do you mean “get back to?” He never ONCE did what the people of Kentucky WANTED or needed. 42 times over Medicaid expansion and the PPACA for example. Talk about SUSPENDING LEGISLATION.

  • Paul Browne

    Obviously Ted Cruz’s $24 billion shut down hasn’t wasted enough tax payer’s money?

  • susanthe

    His time would be better spent getting fitted for a custom toupee that would fit properly and look less ridiculous than his current hair hat.

  • timlinerud

    He just loves to hear the sound of his own voice, but he doesn’t realize how stupid he sounds.

  • Raji the Green Witch

    Can’t we bring Rand Paul to court for tying up our government with frivolous lawsuits and stupid legislation that he KNOWS will never get passed by BOTH houses of Congress? Isn’t the WASTE of money spent on 40+ attempts to get rid of the ACA and just general obstructionism grounds for the American PEOPLE to take his A$$ to court in order to get all that WASTED money back?

    • Dave

      Everybody vote all Republicans out of both houses of Congress and vote democrat for everything before we end up in Nazi America.

      • Raji the Green Witch

        No dave, we do NOT want to exchange ONE version of mismanagement for another version. We need the GOP as well in order to prevent US from doing exactly what the Tea party is doing. the GOP NEEDS to get rid of the extremists in their midst, just as WE got rid of OUR extremists, or tamed them down to the point of irrelevancy. Sharpton is no longer the Rabid extremist he once was. THEY need to corral Cruz, Rand et al, just as we corralled our weirdos. When the GOP was more moderate, we DID get the business of the nation accomplished through reasonable compromise, whi8ch is HOW things SHOULD run. We get something, they get something but NO ONE gets it ALL their way ONLY. Tyranny by US is NO better than tyranny by THEM. We ALL need to do this TOGETHER. We are ALL Americans.

  • Dave

    When the Patriot Act was being pushed thru Congress (by Nazi Republicans, of course.) Anybody that was against it was considered a terrorist sympathizer. Now they blame Obama? What balls the Nazi Rand Paul has. He’s going to end up with his own balls in his mouth.

  • Stephen Barlow

    The trick to getting this into court would be a prima facie case against the President for PERSONALLY ordering surveillance on Rand Paul.

    And unless he is willing to admit on the stand, his terrorist ties to AEI, Am Crossroads and heritage Foundation et al…. This is only noise.

    Besides, the old Nixon scam of national Security will be a genuine STOP to this nonsense.

  • Matthew Reece

    “Maybe I’m wrong, but didn’t Rand Paul’s party give the NSA that very authority?”
    Rand Paul is an individual person who was not in office when the PATRIOT Act was passed.

    • poppaDavid

      Actually Rand Paul was in office when the PATRIOT Act was renewed unedited. He did not vote to approve it.

      The Republican Party was overwhelming in its support. The Democratic Party much less so.

      • Matthew Reece

        This is true, but he was not there for the original PATRIOT Act, and the author seems to be trying to blame Rand for something he had no control over.

      • poppaDavid

        Pardon me for suggesting that you may have a valid point about separating R Paul from the R party on this issue.

        The flip side is that the President is obligated to enforce the laws passed by Congress, and unfortunately the PATRIOT act was. For a member of Congress to sue the President on this looks more like reading “Green Eggs and Ham” than reading legal textbooks.

      • Matthew Reece

        “The flip side is that the President is obligated to enforce the laws passed by Congress”
        If this is true, and it is in theory if not in practice, then the President must have no moral agency. In fact, he is required to be immoral if Congress passes an immoral law. This does not sound like a desirable system.

      • poppaDavid

        If Rand Paul want to file suit to stop the enforcement of a law passed by Congress, perhaps he should include them in the suit?